Crucial element question (again)

questions
#1

Okay, I asked this question (kind of) before and @jhull answered and I thought I understood, but I guess I still don’t, so I’ll cut to the chase:

Not sure if it’s just my storyforms, but it seems like the Crucial Element (that you see in the OS characteristics) is always flipped from where it intuitively should be.

So I have a Steadfast/Stop MC whose symptom is Theory and his response is Hunch. So in my story, I have him unsettled by the dire theories of a professor; he responds to this and moves forward by trusting his gut.

So far so good.

But the OS character window assigns him to the “Theory” characteristic and the IC to “Hunch”. This would seem to mean that the IC (a young woman) challenges the MC’s approach of “Theory” with “Hunch” – which is the opposite of the MC throughline. If he sees the Symptom as Theory, how can Theory be his approach? It would seem that his approach would be Hunch. Right?

Sifting through past posts and Narrative First articles, I know the answer has something to do with the misapplication of one of these elements in relation to the story goal, but I am still having trouble wrapping my head around it. Can anyone point me to an example that clarifies this?

Many thanks…

#2

I think this is the article that will help you the most; it addresses specifically the apparent “reversal” of crucial elements that sometimes seems to happen with Steadfast MCs:

The OS Character Elements can be shown through the character’s approach, but don’t have to be. Instead it can be the character pointing out the problems with others using that approach.

I had this same issue in one of my stories where my Steadfast MC had a Crucial Element of Hinder, which seemed reversed as she was more likely to try to Help (a healer). But then I realized there was WAY more power and meaning in how she represented Hinder – throughout the story she is horribly and unjustly hindered in her life and everything she does, and she ends up the ultimate example of how bad those hindrances are for a whole class of people. She’s not the one hindering, but by being hindered she points out how awful that can be, and a lot of the fault is the IC’s. Understanding that was a huge “aha!” moment for me – not just on Crucial Elements but even for understanding my own story’s meaning.

1 Like
Finding the non-Villain Antagonist
#3

Thanks @mlucas - That’s one of the articles I knew I had read that somewhere but for some reason couldn’t find it.

I really love this example. I think I keep slipping back into a mindset of literal “arguments” between characters (subjective perspective) instead of remembering that this is the element that the storymind represents. Such a crucial distinction.

As a Steadfast Main Character, Moana identifies the element in the environment that must be shifted in order for the Overall Story Solution to take place.

This begins to make sense. So in my case, in order to solve the OS story problem, my character (through his actions or what he represents) has to “point out” or prod to the other characters (including the influence character) how their misapplied theories are preventing a solution. (Or something like that). Does that sound right?

#4

Sorry, just to follow up:

But that would mean that the IC’s Crucial Element is Help, right? So if the IC is causing problems by hindering, the crucial element comes into play at the story’s solution – when the IC stops hindering and starts helping. Is that right?

I guess this is a little confusing to me because the IC problem/solution aren’t in the same dynamic pair as the MC/IC crucial elements. So while a changed MC shares the OS problem/solution, a changed IC doesn’t. So does a changed IC adopt both his/her own solution as well as the MC’s crucial element in the overall story?

#5

That sounds pretty good. Only you would know how it really works in your own story (e.g. in some stories it could be perfectly good, well-applied theories preventing a solution!!). Also, if you don’t totally see how this works in your story yet, I’d suggest just leaving it on the back burner because you might find after developing the rest of your story more that suddenly there is some way the crucial elements work out fantastically.

In that particular story the IC himself wasn’t doing a lot of the hindering. In fact, he was trying to Help the whole country by setting up this whole big system, but the system unintentionally ended up Hindering the MC and others like her. So for that reason (among others), he represented Help in the OS; the Hindering was an indirect effect of his Help.

  • Your first sentence is incorrect (maybe you mis-typed). Like a Changed MC, a Changed IC always shares Problem/Solution with the OS.
  • The changed IC adopts their IC Solution only in the IC throughline
  • I don’t think there are any rules about what the “IC player in the OS” does regarding the MC’s crucial element. In some stories the whole “moving the element” analogy might work in such a way that the IC player represents the “place the element gets moved to” but it doesn’t have to be that way.
#6

I see - that sounds pretty cool actually and makes sense.

Yeah, I got myself turned around. Changed IC always shares problem/solution with the OS.

I was getting confused about the role of the Crucial Element for a changed IC, which is the opposite in the dynamic pair of the MC’s crucial element, but isn’t anywhere on the IC’s throughline.

This is my problem!!! For the past year or more I’ve been having a lot of trouble figuring out how far to develop my stories (with or without Dramatica) before getting into the writing. Let’s just say I haven’t quite found the right balance yet. :slight_smile:

Thanks as always for your answers and feedback Mike.

1 Like